Annihilationism

[Jan001]

You are so stubborn. The worms are eating corpses, not living people. This is not a picture of eternal conscious torment. This is a picture of maggots eating dead bodies, and fire burning corpses. Why can't you see this?

And why are you bringing up Isaiah 66:24 when it has already been refuted as evidence for eternal torture in hell?

Please read the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus. This tormenting of the Rich Man in the flames is forever and ever.

On earth, ordinary worms eat the dead bodies. In hell, the eternal worms eat the eternally condemned.

Their worm does not die because they continually feed on the condemned. The condemned can never be annihilated and so their worm does not ever die.

Mark 9:47-49
And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out; it is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into hell, 48 where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched. 49 For every one will be salted with fire. rsv​

 

[Jan001]

Jan001, Do you remember that I asked you a question?

Do you remember what that question was? Do you remember me asking you what John 3:16 says in your Bible?

Why didn't you answer? Did you ignore the question because answering it would refute your view? Please go to your Bible and look up John 3:16. Kindly post whatever it says as a reply to this post. It doesn't do for people to ignore what the Bible says in their rush to prove that people go to hell when they die where they are tormented alive forever while they are dead.

This is a serious request. If you are serious about discussing this, look at John 3:16 and consider what it says. What does it say in your Bible?

John 3:16
For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. rsv

​

Perhaps it the word "perish" that you want me to discuss?

​

Whoever believes in Jesus Christ shall not perish/be condemned to eternal hell fire.

What is the opposite of eternal life? It is eternal condemnation. Eternal condemnation subjects a person to the eternal torments in the eternal lake of fire/hell.


Perish means to be condemned to the lake of fire. No one is annihilated in the lake of fire. The smoke of their torment lasts forever and ever and their torments never cease. Their torment never lessens in severity.

Revelation 14:11
And the smoke of their torment goes up for ever and ever; and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name.” rsv
​

No one is annihilated in the lake of fire. The RICH MAN was not annihilated and neither will anyone else in the lake of fire be annihilated.

​

​

 

[Jan001]

I understand where you are coming from but this line of argument gets you into a bad spot.

If the worm eats forever, it must have an infinite food supply.

But there is clearly not an infinite number of people in hell - only a finite number of persons will have lived.

So you cannot make the argument you are making - the food supply argument - to support the notion that the worm has something to eat forever and ever.

Besides, I am inclined to agree with Timothew - this an image of the fate of corpses, not living beings.

Each immortal worm feeds upon only one immortal person; therefore each worm has its own eternal food supply. Neither worm nor person can be annihilated.

 

[expos4ever]

Each immortal worm feeds upon only one immortal person; therefore each worm has its own eternal food supply. Neither worm nor person can be annihilated.

Fair enough, but i believe this deals with corpses and is therefore not relevant to the issue of eternal destiny. However if you can convinxe me otherwise I am all ears.

 

[Jan001]

Prove that with scripture please.

Revelation 14:11
And the smoke of their torment goes up for ever and ever; and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name.” rsv
​

The worm and fire is immortal. It does not say the wicked person is immortal.

The worm does not ever die because it continually feeds upon its own wicked person. The wicked person cannot be annihilated because it must be the continual food for its own worm.

​

He clearly was in Hades not the lake of fire. He is thirsty not screaming because he is being burned alive.

Hades was the abode of all the dead, both saved and lost, before the death of Jesus Christ. Hell was a part of Hades and so was the bosom of Abraham a part of Hades. It was Jesus' death which re-opened the entrance to heaven. Adam's sin closed the entrance to heaven and Jesus' sacrifice re-opened the entrance.

The Rich Man was being tormented in the flames of hell. No one is burned up in hell. People are continually tormented by the flames of hell; they are not burned up/annihilated by the flames.

​

 

[hedrick]

​

The Rich Man was being tormented in the flames of hell. No one is burned up in hell. People are continually tormented by the flames of hell; they are not burned up/annihilated by the flames.

Does it bother you that the text says he's in Hades?

 

[StanJ]

The writers of scripture obviously used words in accordance with the meaning ascribed to those words in their particular culture. So one cannot disentangle the meaning of scripture from the cultural / linguistic context in which it was written. So, for example, if a word like "destroy" appears in scripture, we need to read it as understood in that time and place. Of course, it is always possible that the broad scriptural narrative will justify changes in how we read such terms. But that case actually needs to be made - it cannot simply be assumed that words like "destroy" mean something other than what they would have meant in the cultural / linguistic context in which the word was penned.

That's right, and as such the word destroy in that day had the connotation of people dying, along with all their earthly wealth and power, not their spirits being obliterated. Jesus shows this very clearly in Luke 16, where are spirits go after we die. Either to hell or to Paradise. to await Jesus' return.

 

[StanJ]

Does it bother you that the text says he's in Hades?

Hell and Hades are basically the same thing in the New Testament so what exactly would be the problem? It's pretty clear that the scriptures say that Hell/Hades are thrown into the Lake of Fire at The Last Judgement. The only difference between the Lake of Fire and Hell/Hades is that the former is permanent and the latter is temporary just like Paradise is in regards to the New Jerusalem.

 

[Der Alte]

Does it bother you that the text says he's in Hades?

In the Septuagint the Hebrew word שׁאול/sheol is translated as ᾅδης/hades which sometimes refers to the grave but it also appears to refer to a fiery place, where the wicked are sent and from which children can be saved with discipline.

Deuteronomy 32:22 For a fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall burn unto the lowest hell [שׁאול], and shall consume the earth with her increase, and set on fire the foundations of the mountains.
Psalm 9:17 The wicked shall be turned into hell [שׁאול], and all the nations that forget God.
Psalm 55:15 Let death seize upon them, and let them go down quick into hell [שׁאול]: for wickedness is in their dwellings, and among them.
Proverbs 23:14 Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell [שׁאול].
Ezekiel 32:21 The strong among the mighty shall speak to him out of the midst of hell [שׁאול] with them that help him: they are gone down, they lie uncircumcised, slain by the sword.
Ezekiel 32:27 And they shall not lie with the mighty that are fallen of the uncircumcised, which are gone down to hell [שׁאול] with their weapons of war: and they have laid their swords under their heads, but their iniquities shall be upon their bones, though they were the terror of the mighty in the land of the living. ​

In the Jewish Encyclopedia article "Gehenna" which I quoted earlier Sheol/hades is equated with Gehenna. "When Nebuchadnezzar descended into hell [שׁאול], all its inhabitants were afraid that he was coming to rule over them. (Shab. 149a; comp. Isa. xiv. 9-10)."

 

[expos4ever]

That's right, and as such the word destroy in that day had the connotation of people dying, along with all their earthly wealth and power, not their spirits being obliterated.

Source / citation please.

 

[Der Alte]

Source / citation please.

Will this do for a citation? ἀπόλλυμι/Apollumi occurs 86 times in the NT, of this 71 times, 83%, it cannot mean the destruction/annihilation which some argue supposedly occurs at the final judgment. Here is a list of those meanings.
(1) ruin, (2) do not bring about his ruin, (3) put to death, the wicked tenants, (4) he will put the evildoers to a miserable death, (5) destroy the wisdom of the wise, (6) destroy the understanding, (7) lose, (8) lose the reward, (9) lose what we have worked for, (10) lose one’s life, (11) lose oneself, (12) The man who risks his life in battle has the best chance of saving it; the one who flees to save it is most likely to lose it’), (13) ruined, (14) die, the man dies, (15) As a cry of anguish, we are perishing!, (16) of disaster that the stormy sea brings to the seafarer, (17) die by the sword, (18) die of hunger, (19) be corrupted, (20) killed by the snakes, (21) those who are lost, (22) of things be lost, (23) pass away, (24) be ruined, (26) of bursting wineskins, (25) fading beauty, (26) transitory beauty of gold, (27) passing splendor, (28) Of earthly food, (29) spoiled honey, (30) Of falling hair, (31) a member or organ of the body, (32) remnants of food, (33) of wine that has lost its flavor, (34) of sheep gone astray, (35) Of a lost son [that returned].

ἀπόλλυμι for its conj. s. Bl-D. §101 ( s.v. o[llumi ); Rob. 317; fut. ajpolevsw Hs 8, 7, 5, Att. ajpolw` 1 Cor 1:19 (Is 29:14 ); 1 aor. ajpwvlesa ; 1 pf. ajpolwvleka ; fut. mid. ajpolou`mai Lk 13:3 ; 2 aor. ajpwlovmhn ; the 2 pf. ajpovlwla serves as a pf. mid ., ptc. ajpolwlwv" ( Hom. +; inscr. , pap. , LXX , En. , Philo , Joseph. , Test. 12 Patr. ).
1. act .— a. ruin, destroy.
a. of pers. (Sir 10:3 ) Mk 1:24 ; Lk 4:34 . W. ref. to eternal destruction mh; ejkei`non ajpovllue do not bring about his ruin Ro 14:15 . Esp. kill, put to death (Gen 20:4 ; Esth 9:6 v.l .; 1 Macc 2:37 ; Jos. , C. Ap. 1, 122) Hs 9, 26, 7. paidivon Mt 2:13 ; Jesus 12:14 ; 27:20 ; Mk 3:6 ; 11:18 ; Lk 19:47 ; B 12:5; [kill] the wicked tenants kakou;" kakw`" aj. ( s. kakov" 1a) he will put the evildoers to a miserable death Mt 21:41 . tou;" gewrgouv" Mk 12:9 ; Lk 20:16 ; t. fonei`" Mt 22:7 ; t. mh; pisteuvsanta" those who did not believe Jd 5 ; pavnta" Lk 17:27 , 29 . W. sw`sai (1ike Charito 2, 8, 1) Js 4:12 ; Hs 9, 23, 4. Of eternal death ( Herm. Wr. 4, 7) yuch;n k. sw`ma aj. ejn geevnnh/ Mt 10:28 ; yuchvn B 20:1; t. yucav" Hs 9, 26, 3 ( cf. Sir 20:22 ).
b. w. impers. obj. aj. t. sofivan t. sofw`n destroy the wisdom of the wise 1 Cor 1:19 (Is 29:14 ). aj. t. diavnoian destroy the understanding Hm 11:1.— g. without obj. J 10:10 .
b. lose ( X. , Pla. +; PPetr. III 51, 5; POxy. 743, 23; PFay. 111, 3 ff ; Sir 6:3 ; 9:6 ; 27:16 et al .; Tob 7:6 BA; 4 Macc 2:14 ) t. misqovn lose the reward Mt 10:42 ; Mk 9:41 ; Hs 5, 6, 7. dracmhvn ( Dio Chrys. 70[20], 25) Lk 15:8 f ; aj. a} hjrgasavmeqa lose what we have worked for 2J 8 . diaqhvkhn B 4:6, 8. th;n zwh;n t. ajnqrwvpwn Hm 2:1; cf. s 8, 6, 6; 8, 7, 5; 8, 8, 2 f and 5. th;n ejlpivda m 5, 1, 7.— W . colloqu. flavor i{na pa`n o} devdwkevn moi mhv ajpolevsw ejx aujtou` that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me J 6:39 ( Bl-D. §466, 3; Rob. 437; 753).— aj. th;n yuchvn ( cf. Sir 20:22 ) lose one’s life Mt 10:39 ; 16:25 ; Mk 8:35 ; Lk 9:24 ; 17:33 ; cf. J 12:25 . For this aj. eJautovn lose oneself Lk 9:25 (similar in form is Tyrtaeus Lyr. [VII BC ], fgm. 8 Diehl 2 lines 12 ff : ‘The man who risks his life in battle has the best chance of saving it; the one who flees to save it is most likely to lose it’).
2. mid .— a. be destroyed, ruined.
a. of pers. perish, die ( schol. on Nicander , Ther. 188 ajpovllutai oJ ajnhvr =the man dies) 1 Cl 51:5; 55:6; B 5:4, 12; D 16:5; Hs 6, 2, 1 f. As a cry of anguish ajpolluvmeqa we are perishing! ( PPetr. II 4, 4 nuni; de; ajpolluvmeqa ) Mt 8:25 ; Mk 4:38 ; Lk 8:24 ( Arrian , Peripl. 3, 3 of disaster that the stormy sea brings to the seafarer). ejn macaivrh/ aj. die by the sword Mt 26:52 . limw`/ [die] of hunger (Ezk 34:29 ) Lk 15:17 . th`/ ajntilogiva/ tou` Kovre Jd 11 c (because of 11a and b it should perh. = be corrupted; cf. Polyb. 32, 23, 6). uJpo; tino" ( Hdt. 5. 126; Dio Chrys. 13[7], 12) uJpo; t. o[fewn killed by the snakes 1 Cor 10:9 ; cf. vs. 1 0. Abs. of a people perish J 11:50 . Of individuals (Lev 23:30 ) Ac 5:37 ; 2 Pt 3:9 ; 1 Cl 12:6; 39:5 (Job 4:20 ).—Esp. of eternal death ( cf. Ps 9:6 f ; 36:20; 67:3 ; 91:10 ; Is 41:11 ) J 3:16 ; 17:12 . ajpolevsqai eij" to;n aijw`na perish forever 10:28 (Bar 3:3 hJmei`" ajpolluvmenoi to;n aijw`na). ajnovmw" aj. Ro 2:12 ; mwrw`" aj. IEph 17:2; ejn kauchvsei because of boasting ITr 4:1; cf. IPol 5:2. Abs. 1 Cor 8:11 ; 15:18 ; 2 Cl 17:1.— oiJ ajpolluvmenoi ( opp. oiJ sw/zovmenoi , like Plut. , Mor. 469 D ) those who are lost 1 Cor 1:18 ; 2 Cor 2:15 ; 4:3 ; 2 Th 2:10 ; 2 Cl 1:4; 2:5. For this to; ajpolwlov" Lk 19:10 (Mt 18:11 —Ezk 34:4 , 16 ). ta; ajpolluvmena 2 Cl 2:7 ( cf. Dit., Syll. 3 417, 9 ta; te ajpolwlovta ejk t. iJerou` ajnevswsan ). b. of things be lost, pass away, be ruined ( Jos. , Bell. 2, 650 of Jerusalem) of bursting wineskins Mk 9:17 ; Mk 2:22 ; Lk 5:37 ; fading beauty Js 1:11 ; transitory beauty of gold 1 Pt 1:7 ; passing splendor Rv 18:14 ( w. ajpov as Jer 10:11 ; Da 7:17 ). Of earthly food J 6:27 ; spoiled honey Hm 5, 1, 5. Of the heavens which, like the earth, will pass away Hb 1:11 (Ps 101:27 ). Of the end of the world Hv 4, 3, 3, Of the way of the godless, which is lost in darkness B 11:7 (Ps 1:6 ).
b. be lost (Antipho 54 Diels, Vorsokrat. ajpolovmenon ajrguvrion ; X. , Symp. 1, 5; 1 Km 9:3 ) ISm 10:1. Of falling hair Lk 21:18 ; Ac 27:34 ; a member or organ of the body Mt 5:29 f ; remnants of food J 6:12
. Of wine that has lost its flavor Hm 12, 5, 3.—Of sheep gone astray Mt 10:6 ; 15:24 ; Lk 15:4 , 6 ; B 5:12 ( cf. Jer 27:6 ; Ezk 34:4 ; Ps 118:176 ). Of a lost son [who has returned]Lk 15:24 ( Artem. 4, 33 hJ gunhv. . . t. uiJo;n ajpwvlese kai. . . eu|ren aujtovn .—JSchniewind, D. Gleichn. vom verl. Sohn ’40). aj. qew`/ be lost to God Hs 8, 6, 4. M-M. B. 758; 766.
Bauer,Arndt,Gingrich Greek Lexicon online​

 

[hedrick]

Will this do for a citation? ἀπόλλυμι/Apollumi occurs 86 times in the NT, of this 71 times, 83%, it cannot mean the destruction/annihilation which some argue supposedly occurs at the final judgment. Here is a list of those meanings.

Sure. TDNT says that the literal meaning is destroy or kill, but there are also non-literal uses. The examples you cite (without looking at every one) seem to refer to people or things in this life. When someone in this life is destroyed or die, they are no longer alive in this life. That doesn't involve destruction of their soul.

But the context we’re talking about is of a soul or a resurrected person, i.e. we’re in the context of a second life. What happens when you destroy someone there? Either speaking literally, they cease to exist in that life, or somewhat less literally, their existence is seriously degraded. We’re no longer talking about destroying a body, while the soul can go to the next life, because we’re now in the next life.

I doubt there’s a third life they could end up in.

Destruction could certainly be non-literal, referring to a major degrading of the person but not a full destruction. Just as in this life you can talk about destroying a person when you’re really only destroying something about them, such as their reputation. But in light of other NT imagery about judgement, such as the fire, I don’t think this is plausible. If we had other reason to believe that people were tormented forever, I could accept that this could be called destruction. But there isn’t.

Note that I’m perfectly willing to accept the possibility that some kind of “ash” or “ex-human” remains. I’ve said that a couple of times. The outer darkness could suggest an existence completely separated from the ground of existence. I would think in that kind of situation a person might just kind of fade away, but not necessarily to complete non-existence. It’s continuing intentional torment by God that I don’t think is consistent with Jesus or Paul. (I’m reluctant to get doctrine from the Revelation, for obvious reasons, though I doubt that even it teaches this.)

 

[StanJ]

Source / citation please.

Luke 16, as I had already indicated in that post which you cut up for this question, which I find a very disingenuous way of having an honest and constructive discussion as you purport to want.

 

[expos4ever]

Jesus shows this very clearly in Luke 16, where are spirits go after we die. Either to hell or to Paradise. to await Jesus' return.

Textbook example if begging the question. You cannot simply assume that which you need to substantiate with an argument. More specifically, you cannot simply assume that like 16 is literal.

 

[expos4ever]

Luke 16, as I had already indicated in that post which you cut up for this question, which I find a very disingenuous way of having an honest and constructive discussion as you purport to want.

No. Circular reasoning. The issue is what would the people of that time and culture have meant by the word "destroy". Are you able to defend the definition you provided without engaging in the obvious circular reasoning of assuming that Luke 16 is literal in order to defend the restrictive sense in which you interpret the word "destroy".

 

[StanJ]

Textbook example if begging the question. You cannot simply assume that which you need to substantiate with an argument. More specifically, you cannot simply assume that like 16 is literal.

Well maybe you can show us exactly what textbook you're talking about or referring to but in the meantime I can assume that the word of God is true and accurate and inspired because it is. Apparently you don't believe it is which opens up a whole new area of conflict that will develop if that is your view. Maybe you can show me how Luke 16 regarding Lazarus and the rich man is not literal? Did Jesus use any metaphorical or hyperbolic language there? If so please identify exactly where they were?

 

[StanJ]

No. Circular reasoning. The issue is what would the people of that time and culture have meant by the word "destroy". Are you able to defend the definition you provided without engaging in the obvious circular reasoning of assuming that Luke 16 is literal in order to defend the restrictive sense in which you interpret the word "destroy".

Well if you're not going to accept God's Word as to what the people at that time and culture meant by the word 'destroy', then you show us how it was understood then, using Scripture. It's not restrictive at all it's in context with the situation described. Apparently you want every word used to be used in its broadest meaning possible and that's just not how the English language works, nor the Greek, nor the Hebrew, for that matter. That is called equivocation.

 

[Der Alte]

Sure. TDNT says that the literal meaning is destroy or kill, but there are also non-literal uses. The examples you cite (without looking at every one) seem to refer to people or things in this life. When someone in this life is destroyed or die, they are no longer alive in this life. That doesn't involve destruction of their soul.
But the context we’re talking about is of a soul or a resurrected person, i.e. we’re in the context of a second life. What happens when you destroy someone there? Either speaking literally, they cease to exist in that life, or somewhat less literally, their existence is seriously degraded. We’re no longer talking about destroying a body, while the soul can go to the next life, because we’re now in the next life.
I doubt there’s a third life they could end up in.

Interesting opinion but a very noticeable absence of scriptural or lexical evidence such as I have provided.

Destruction could certainly be non-literal, referring to a major degrading of the person but not a full destruction. Just as in this life you can talk about destroying a person when you’re really only destroying something about them, such as their reputation. But in light of other NT imagery about judgement, such as the fire, I don’t think this is plausible. If we had other reason to believe that people were tormented forever, I could accept that this could be called destruction. But there isn’t.

I appreciate your thoughts on this but I would prefer a scriptural argument supported by lexical and historical evidence.

 

[sdowney717]

Those whose destiny is the lake of fire, the second death are already dead. They were dead in their life in their body of flesh, and they are still just as dead after they are dead. Never were they alive spiritually. To be spiritually dead is to not be alive in the spirit. The only way we become spiritually alive is to be born of God, otherwise all are dead. God's judgment is fair and righteous and all these dead ones deserve the second death. They being dead died in life as dead men, and they at the judgment still being dead can not reign with God and Christ, never having been born again. Jesus tells us about them this, 'let the dead bury the dead, but as for you, come and follow me'. So does Christ relate to all those He has foreknown beforehand in love. Ephesians 2.

To have life according to your own works, is specifically taught against. Here in Rev 20, the judgment is either the second death or the Book of Life, according to their works. The Book of Life has the names of all those born of God, given to Christ by the Father, John 17. Christ had already descended into hell and delivered the righteous saved dead, OT saints and led them captive, taking them into heaven. So the only ones left in Hell are these new dead who died in their sins after the resurrection and the ones who died. To die in your sins means your sins are not forgiven for the sake of His name, and that means eternal torment. That rich man in hell is still in hell today 2000 years later.

The lake of fire second death has a sense of finality, a final judgment, hell being a temporary abode of the dead. Hell ends in this creation with the creation of new heavens and new earth, so this is where all dead go, while all who are alive reign with God and Christ in a new universe.


Rev 20

The Great White Throne Judgment
11 Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works. 14 Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. 15 And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire.

 

[StanJ]

Those whose destiny is the lake of fire, the second death are already dead. They were dead in their life in their body of flesh, and they are still just as dead after they are dead. Never were they alive spiritually. To be spiritually dead is to not be alive in the spirit. The only way we become spiritually alive is to be born of God, otherwise all are dead. God's judgment is fair and righteous and all these dead ones deserve the second death. They being dead died in life as dead men, and they at the judgment still being dead can not reign with God and Christ, never having been born again. Jesus tells us about them this, 'let the dead bury the dead, but as for you, come and follow me'. So does Christ relate to all those He has foreknown beforehand in love. Ephesians 2.

To have life according to your own works, is specifically taught against. Here in Rev 20, the judgment is either the second death or the Book of Life, according to their works. The Book of Life has the names of all those born of God, given to Christ by the Father, John 17. Christ had already descended into hell and delivered the righteous saved dead, OT saints and led them captive, taking them into heaven. So the only ones left in Hell are these new dead who died in their sins after the resurrection and the ones who died. To die in your sins means your sins are not forgiven for the sake of His name, and that means eternal torment. That rich man in hell is still in hell today 2000 years later.

The lake of fire second death has a sense of finality, a final judgment, hell being a temporary abode of the dead. Hell ends in this creation with the creation of new heavens and new earth, so this is where all dead go, while all who are alive reign with God and Christ in a new universe.


Rev 20

The Great White Throne Judgment
11 Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works. 14 Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. 15 And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire.

Where exactly do you see the Bible saying that we are spiritually dead or that anybody is virtually dead? Death always refers to the physical body. It is the lack of Lifeforce that makes one dead. When we die our spirit does not die it simply goes to await Jesus's return and Unite with our bodies to be changed in the twinkling of an eye to an Incorruptible/immortal version of ourselves so that we can live eternally with our God and savior in the New Jerusalem.